Daramola v. Oracle Am., Inc., 92 F.4th 833 (9th Cir. 2024)

Tayo Daramola is a Canadian citizen who resided in Montreal at all relevant times and who worked for Oracle Canada, a wholly owned subsidiary of Oracle Corporation (a California‑based company). Daramola’s employment agreement stated that it was governed by Canadian law. During his employment, Daramola, who worked remotely, conducted business and collaborated with colleagues in Canada and the United States and was assigned as lead project manager for the implementation of an Oracle product at institutions of higher education in Texas, Utah, and Washington. In time, Daramola came to believe that by offering this product, Oracle was committing fraud, and he reported same to Oracle and the SEC. Eventually, Daramola resigned his employment based upon his “unwillingness to take part in fraud.” He then filed a lawsuit in federal court in California, claiming violations of the Sarbanes‑Oxley Act and the Dodd‑Frank Act, as well as the California whistleblower protection act, Cal. Lab. Code § 1102.5. The district court dismissed the lawsuit after twice giving Daramola leave to amend his complaint. The Ninth Circuit affirmed dismissal of the action, holding that the anti‑retaliation provisions of the state and federal statutes at issue did not apply to Daramola, a Canadian citizen working out of Canada for a Canadian subsidiary of a U.S.‑based parent company.